Search in:

Europe's boat people numbers make ours look minuscule

Richard Ackland

It's the summer boat season in Europe. Everyone's out on their boats, including tens of thousands of refugees from Africa making the trip across the Mediterranean. Not all of them make it.

So far this year about 42,000 people have tried to cross the Med to get to Italy. They're from Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Syria – anywhere in Africa and the Middle East beset by bloodletting. Men, women and children.

About this time last year the comparable number was 3362 arrivals in Italy. The humanitarian problems are escalating at an alarming rate and the EU and UN are thrashing about for solutions.

Sicily bears the brunt of the Italian influx, since the closure of the reception centre on Lampedusa, close to where 366 drowned last October. Greece too is under siege, with the government saying 15,000 undocumented migrants last year attempted to enter Europe.

Advertisement

Italian authorities estimate that there are 800,000 people sitting on the coast of Africa, waiting for a chance to cross.

The mayor of the Sicilian town of Catania was quoted in the press as saying that Europe faced "a looming, colossal humanitarian catastrophe".

That should put our little old "illegal maritime arrivals" problems into perspective, with 51,637 arriving by boat on our shores over five years between 2009 and 2013 (parliamentary research figures). The peak year for us was 2013 with 20,587 arrivals, about half what Italy has received in the past five months.

The Refugee Council of Australia's figures for 2006 to 2011 show Italy had 152,821 irregular maritime arrivals, Yemen a massive 342,192 and even tiny Malta with a population of 420,000 had 9372 arrivals in this period.

The "looming catastrophe" is so serious that the UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, is rethinking its approach. It is looking at ways to create safe refugee holding centres in North Africa and the Middle East. In other words, for the first time, the UN is thinking about offshore processing for refugees heading to Europe.

The UNHCR's European director, Vincent Cochetel, was quoted saying: "We would not be totally against external processing if certain safeguards were in place: the right to appeal, fair process, the right to remain while appeals take place."

You can't image any of that happening in Egypt, Libya or Sudan, just as you can't imagine it happening in other places nearer to hand with poor human rights records, viz. Papua New Guinea, Nauru or Cambodia.

In effect, there would have to be EU bolt holes planted in the middle of chaotic landscapes and protected by small standing armies. Instead of border protection the focus would be on developing safe pathways for genuine refugees.

You'd have to wonder why aren't the Europeans and the UN reaching out to a strongman with the answers, like Admiral Tow-Backs Morrison? He's dealt with a few thousand asylum seekers/refugees on his watch, so why couldn't he scale up to 800,000?

He could transfer his "solution" to the European theatre of war: tow-backs, long periods of detention at a "processing centre" in Somalia with attendant riots, physical and mental deterioration, doses of terrorising from local guards, refoulement, cancellation of legal assistance, then eventual resettlement for genuine refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

It would work a treat and it would get the hardline anti-boat vote back where it belongs, with decent democratic Christians.

As it stands, the refugee crisis in Europe is the main factor fuelling the rise of the ultra right and neo-fascist parties. Outfits like the Golden Dawn party in Greece have shamelessly exploited the refugee problems and made major gains in European elections.

Xenophobes in Italy are demanding an end to the Mare Nostrum operation, which so far has rescued 30,000 people at sea.

Silvio Berlusconi introduced a law making it an offence to enter the country illegally, punishable by up to four years' jail. Still they come. Nearly half the Italian jail population is composed of foreigners. "Illegals" are an easy target for populists to exploit, and yet populists offer no real policy prescription for one of the planet's enduring problems: human displacement.

Refoulement, or sending people back from where they came, is now one of Morrison's important policy prescriptions.

Last October the minister said: "Anyone who may have come from Sri Lanka should know that they will go back to Sri Lanka."

In view of that, maybe it was not surprising that a Tamil man burnt himself to death in Melbourne. Leorsin Seemanpillai was waiting for the outcome of his claim for asylum.

Australia is particularly pally with the odious Rajapaksa regime in Sri Lanka and seems oblivious to evidence about the treatment of Tamils in that country.

But back to the global perspective. There are all sorts of way to measure our kindness to refugees. The one favoured by the government is to pick our intake under the official UNHCR humanitarian program and measure it on a national per capita basis. That puts Australia at No.3 in the world after the US and Canada.

However, if you look at what we call our onshore intake, people who have been found to have refugee status after arriving by plane or boat, our ranking drops to No.32 on 2012 global figures. We fall below Sudan, Afghanistan, Gambia, Chad and Burundi.

The UN data shows we took 8367 onshore asylum seekers as refugees in 2012, which is 0.61 percent of the global total recognised as refugees.

Since 1978, an average of less than two boat people a day have arrived in Australia.

What's to whinge about?

Twitter: @JustinianNews

213 comments so far

So Europe, population 739 million (2011), has had 42,000 boat people in 5 months.

Meanwhile Australia, population 23 million, had 13,108 boat people in the 6 months to 30 June, 2013.

It doesn't take a mathematical genius to realise that Australia has been inundated by these people more than in Europe.

Commenter

The Village Idiot (Reformed)

Date and time

June 05, 2014, 11:33PM

The thing is, BOAT PEOPLE ARE NOT REFUGEES,!they are economic migrants. They have flown to Indonesia a place where they aren't suffering any persecution and are in a country that is consistent with their religion.

If they wish to migrate to Australia, for economic purposes, then they can join the queue.By getting on a boat they are lying about their status and jumping the queue.

There are millions more refugees who are in far worse wretched conditions that they have denied access into Australia

Commenter

Aesop

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 4:28AM

Thank you Richard Ackland - a time to reflect.This is an enormous challenge for the global community - quite frankly, a broadly acceptable solution appears beyond the reach of us all. Discussions are often heated - with little room for respect for the opinions of those who would disagree with us; it is easy to fall back on to cherished default positions - accusing the other side of (i) pretensions to moral superiority or (ii) rank naivety (failing to consider the potential problems).Surely, any opportunity to discuss this complex issue is a good thing - please note the word 'discuss'.Is it presumptuous of me to say there is no 'perfect' or one ideal solution? This topic segues nicely into questions of - what is a 'sensible' number of refugees/immigrants to accept on a yearly basis, population (what is a 'good' number for Australia), infrastructure spending (to support a growing population), overcrowding in capital cities, environmental degradation, our capacity to absorb these desperate souls, their ability to integrate, etc.You can't discuss refugees - without also considering these things.People have differing degrees of concern and sense of responsibility for the refugees - who is 'right' or 'wrong'?Is there an absolute and inviolable 'truth' here? Oh..Vituperative barbs and indignation, That will help resolve this situation. How many refugees to welcome here,Whilst not provoking too much fear.Oh..Do you know the population number,That on our soil we could lumber?Is to ask this far too selfish a view?And no limit to set on people new? Oh..Everywhere to see, misery and grief,Yet we offer some modicum of relief.There is a world of bottomless need,Just how many mouths can we feed?

Commenter

Howe Synnott

Location

Sydney

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 4:44AM

Rudd's pink batts fiasco pales into insignificance compared to the cost of his efforts to dismantle our border controls. And if the Europeans can't manage their borders, thats their problem.

Commenter

SteveH.

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 5:17AM

@The Unreformed Village Idiot - Whatever Europe's population is,and however united or not the EU - it is actually a continent and not a country.

There are national and local rules, and EU rules - and one of the EU rules is that asylum seekers must be processed in the country where they are first registered.

Commenter

Ross

Location

MALLABULA

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 5:20AM

So Aesop, You personally know as a fact that boat people are not refugees and you also know for a fact they are all Muslim? There was me thinking you were just making sweeping racist generalisations but of course you can produce the data to back up your claims yes? Please do, I'm waiting.

Commenter

PP

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 5:22AM

hi Aesop - are you seriously arguing that economic migrants would take so great a risk of drowning, but that genuine refugees would not?

Commenter

Ross

Location

MALLABULA

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 5:36AM

An asylum seeker is, by definition, a person who claims to be a refugee and is waiting for that claim to be assessed. It is impossible to say one way or the other whether their protection claims are credible until they have been assessed. Historically, however, the vast majority of asylum seekers who have reached Australia by boat have been found to be refugees. According to figures compiled by the Australian Parliamentary Library, between 70 and 97 per cent have typically been found to be refugees. In 2012-13, 88 per cent of asylum seekers who arrived by boat were found to be refugees.

Even if an asylum seeker is found not to be a refugee, however, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the person is an economic migrant or that his or her refugee claim was “made up”. It simply means that the person isn’t a refugee. For example, some asylum seekers may legitimately fear persecution but this fear may not be well-founded (e.g. they don’t have enough evidence to back up their claims) or they may fear a form of mistreatment which isn’t sufficiently serious to trigger Australia’s protection obligations. Even people who have a well-founded fear of serious persecution may be found not to be refugees if they are able to avoid persecution by moving to another area within their home countries, or if the authorities in their home countries are able to provide effective protection.

Commenter

David Hill

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 6:24AM

We are very lucky to have Abbott and Morrison in charge - the boats have stopped coming and no doubt all the illegals who wanted to come here are now targeting Europe. And good luck for the illegals - if the EU is so stupid to have their gates wide open - let them pay the price.Australia has shown the world the way to deal with the illegals economic arrivals but the political class of do-gooders of Europe can't get - and when finally the EU public wakes up it will be too late - as the problem is already out of control in Italy, Spain, UK, France.....

Commenter

Ted

Date and time

June 06, 2014, 7:12AM

The Village Idiot,

Except they are not landing in Europe, They are landing in Italy, Greece, Yemen, Malta, etc. In case you were not aware these are actually separate countries from the country you imagine called Europe. Their individual contributions somewhat outpace ours!!!!

Most Commented

Special offers

Hodson's daughter: Witness protection not safe

"I feel sorry for anyone coming into witness protection," says the tearful daughter of police informer Terence Hodson after the State Coroner delivered an open finding into his murder and that of his wife Christine in 2004.